Local MCP

Teams List Transcripts

teams_list_transcripts

Read-only

Lists the Microsoft Teams calls started from a chat and the calendar meetings that have a transcript, newest first, from the transcript events in the account's 50 most recent chats (in each, its newest 50 messages; a meeting's are in its meeting chat). Each row's transcript_id feeds teams_read_transcript. Listing needs no extra permission; reading a transcript does (see teams_read_transcript). Optional since/until (YYYY-MM-DD) narrow the range. A chat the account cannot read (403 or 404) is skipped and counted in skipped_chats. Needs a work or school Microsoft 365 account connected with connect_m365_account.

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "teams_list_transcripts"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`limit`	No	Max transcripts to return (default 20, at most 50)
`since`	No	Only transcripts on/after this date, YYYY-MM-DD (optional)
`until`	No	Only transcripts on/before this date, YYYY-MM-DD (optional)
`account`	No	Which connected Microsoft 365 account to use: its email (UPN), its id from list_m365_accounts, or its display name when unique. Leave it out to use the default account.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description
`note`	No
`count`	No
`error`	No
`source`	No
`account`	No	The email (UPN) of the Microsoft 365 account this call used.
`truncated`	No	Present and true only when the read was cut before it had everything it was asked for.
`transcripts`	No
`skipped_chats`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedNov 7, 2026

TDQS

A4.6/5.0

Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Goes well beyond the readOnly/openWorld annotations: it discloses the scan scope (50 most recent chats, newest 50 messages each), that unreadable chats (403/404) are skipped and tallied in skipped_chats, and the permission asymmetry between listing and reading. These are behavioral traits an agent could not infer from structured fields.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Information-dense and front-loaded with what is listed, followed by scope, cross-reference, permissions, and prerequisite. The middle sentence is long and clause-heavy, which slightly hurts scannability, but no sentence is filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Despite an output schema existing, the description still explains the skipped_chats field and the transcript_id handoff, and it covers scope limits, permissions, and the account prerequisite. An agent has everything needed to decide to call it and interpret partial results.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so limit, since, until, and account are already documented. The description restates the YYYY-MM-DD format for since/until and adds the account-type constraint (work or school), but says nothing extra about limit or the default-account fallback beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ("Lists ... the Microsoft Teams calls started from a chat and the calendar meetings that have a transcript") with ordering ("newest first"). It clearly separates itself from teams_read_transcript by noting that each row's transcript_id feeds that sibling.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly says when this vs. the read path applies: "Listing needs no extra permission; reading a transcript does (see teams_read_transcript)." It also names the prerequisite ("Needs a work or school Microsoft 365 account connected with connect_m365_account").

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Local MCP tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.